6

I noticed on Stack Exchange that if an answer to a question is accepted, it is always first when sorting the answers by oldest - even if it wasn't the first answer.

Is that by design? Doesn't it break with the very point of sorting by oldest/newest?

(One example side-effect: when sorting by oldest to give rep to the one who provided a duplicate answer first, you're intuitively assuming the accepted one was first unless explicitly checking via mouse-over as noted by retracile.)

Improve this question
4
  • 1
    But doesn't it make sense to give the accepted answer prominence, even if it overrides the oldest/newest sort order?
    – pavium
    Commented Dec 8, 2009 at 2:26
  • 1
    Prominence yes, but losing part of the actual oldest*/*newest information (i.e. when you're limited to say 1 hour ago)?
    – Georg Fritzsche
    Commented Dec 8, 2009 at 2:28
  • 4
    You can hover over the time to get the exact timestamp (well, to the second anyway). Granted, that's not as straightforward.
    – retracile
    Commented Dec 8, 2009 at 2:32
  • Oh, i didn't notice - thats helpful.
    – Georg Fritzsche
    Commented Dec 8, 2009 at 2:45

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
5

This is definitely going to be marked "by-design".

However, I too find it frustrating that, If I'm searching for the actual oldest post, the sort order is not what I asked...

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .